Both Proposition B and Proposition C concern development on the 8 Washington Street Site. If both measures pass and there is found conflicting portions of Proposition B and C then the proposition which receives less "yes" votes would be disregarded in part or in whole.[1]

The project approved if Proposition B passes would develop the 8 Washington Street waterfront area, tearing out the fence and parking lot currently in place and adding high-rise condos, restaurants, a playground, sidewalks and other developments.[1]

Proposition C is a referendum attempt by opponents to the 8 Washington Street Development. Those who collected signatures to have Proposition C put on the ballot are hoping electors will vote "no", thus preventing a height limit increasing ordinance approved by the board of supervisors. This height limit increase is essential to the development project proposed by Proposition B.[1]

Text of measure

Proposition B

The question on the ballot:

Proposition B:

Shall the City allow a development project at the 8 Washington Street Site
that would include new housing, retail and recreational facilities, and open
space, and would increase the legal building height limits on a portion of
the Site?[1][2]

Arguments in favor

Proponents of Propositions B and C argue that the development plan authorized by the proposals:[1]

includes improvement of the property in question with added accessibility, parks, playgrounds, widened sidewalks, open views, affordable housing, and up to 250 temporary new jobs and 140 permanent new jobs, with $100 million injected into San Francisco's economy.

is part of a larger plan for the revitalization of the waterfront, produced over seven years by the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, the San Francisco Planning Commission, the Port Commission and the State Lands Commission through planning and over a hundred meetings.

will remove the current eyesore of asphalt parking lots and massive chain link fences.

Opposition

Opponents

Individuals

Board of Supervisors President David Chiu

Former Mayor Art Agnos

Former City Attorney Louise Renne

Allan Jacobs, Former Director of the San Francisco Planning Department

Arguments against

Opponents to Propositions B and C argue that the proposed plan for the waterfront development is harmful in the following ways:

It provides opportunities, through raising the waterfront height limits, for big businesses to build massive buildings blocking off the waterfront instead of revitalizing it.

Its campaign is deceptive because it does not even mention the raising of these height limits but focuses instead on a park and increased jobs.

It proposes a play ground that is only a campaign trick as it is, in fact, smaller than a tennis court.

It touts "affordable housing" but intends to build condos costing an average of $5 million each, with no actual affordable housing in the plans.

It will include a lot of private space with gated and "member only" areas and not the public recreation promised by the Yes on B campaign.

It could cause huge sewage spills from broken sewage lines.

By introducing very expensive condos, it will increase housing costs for the entire area

Two thirds of the "park areas" created by the development will be private, not public.

The high density it proposes is out of place and scale with the neighborhoods of San Francisco.

The proposal would undo the work done to remove the Embarcadero Freeway, which was done to increase open space. The proposed building height increase would allow buildings that would be twice the height of the old Embarcadero Freeway.

Media endorsements

Support

The San Francisco Chronicle: "A vote for Props. B and C would be an affirmation of a rigorous, inclusive, exhaustive planning process. Vote yes on B and C."[5][6]

Analysis

The voter pamphlet provides the following analysis and summary for Proposition B:

The way it is now

“

The site proposed for development
as 8 Washington Street is 3.2 acres bounded by the
Embarcadero, Washington Street and Drumm Street
(the Site). Approximately 80% of the Site is owned by
Golden Gateway Center and used as walkways and a
privately operated tennis and swim facility. The
remaining 20% is a public parking lot under the jurisdiction
of the City and County of San Francisco’s Port
Commission.

In 2012 the Board of Supervisors (the Board) approved
a development project for the Site involving construction
of two mixed-use buildings containing 134 residential
units, ground floor restaurants and retail, a privately
operated fitness and swim facility, a public park
and open spaces, and underground public and private
parking.

In approving the development project, the Board also
adopted an Ordinance to increase the legal building
height limits on a portion of the project. Then a referendum
(Proposition C) qualified for the ballot requiring
that the Ordinance be submitted to the voters.
Later, this initiative (Proposition B) dealing with the
same Site qualified for the ballot.[1][2]

”

A diagram showing the waterfront area location and planned developments

The proposal

“

Proposition B would create a special use
district known as the 8 Washington Parks, Public
Access and Housing District. The district would require
the 8 Washington Street Site project to include:

two buildings housing a total of between 121 and 141 residential units;

an increase in the legal building height limits on an approximately half-acre portion (16% of the Site) along Drumm Street from 84 feet to 92 feet in one section and from 84 feet to 136 feet in another;

a privately operated fitness and swim facility, with a two-story height limit;

a height limit of 6 stories for the residential building along the Embarcadero;

payment by the developer to the affordable housing fund of the City and County of San Francisco as required by law;

a public park, open space, walkways and sidewalks on at least 20% of the Site;

new and expanded pedestrian access to the waterfront and enhanced bicycle and pedestrian safety;

ground floor retail and cafés;

underground private and public automobile and bicycle parking; and

increased revenue for the Port and the City.

A “YES” Vote Means: If you vote “yes,” you want to
approve the 8 Washington Street Site development
project, which includes new housing, retail and
recreational facilities and open space. It would also
increase the building height limits on a portion of the
Site.

A “NO” Vote Means: If you vote “no,” you do not want
to approve the 8 Washington Street Site development
project.[1][2]

”

Controller's statement

City Controller Ben Rosenfield wrote the following about Proposition B:

“

Should the proposed ordinance be approved by the
voters and the proposed project at 8 Washington
Street be built as currently approved, in my opinion, it
would result in near-term tax revenues of approximately
$4 million which can be used by the City for
any public purpose, approximately $11 million in fee
payments to fund affordable housing and approximately
$4.8 million in fee payments to fund transit
improvements. The Port of San Francisco would
receive approximately $3 million in near-term revenues
from the sale of a seawall lot for the project, as
well as a percentage of property sales. In addition, the
developer would construct a public park and improve
public utilities and infrastructure.

The ordinance provides for the establishment of a special
use district on a 3.2-acre site on the northern
waterfront and other approvals required for construction
of the development referred to as 8 Washington
Street. As noted above, the financial terms benefitting
the City and the Port in the proposed project include
an affordable housing fund contribution, transit impact
development fees, and a percentage of property sales
to be paid directly to the Port.

Estimated future revenues that would be generated by
the project would vary depending on market conditions
and other factors, but certainly the assessed
value of the area would increase and result in significant
additional property tax and sales tax revenues to
the City and the Port. Over the long-term life (sixty-six
years) of the project, tax revenues, added property
value and park and open space improvements accruing
to the City and the Port are projected at more than
$350 million, valued at approximately $82 million in
today’s dollars.

The above amounts do not include potential operating
and infrastructure costs for other City departments.
This statement does not address the potential impacts
of the project on businesses, private property or the
local economy.[1][2]

”

Path to ballot

On July 12, 2013, the Department of Elections certified
that the initiative petition calling for Proposition B to
be placed on the ballot had a sufficient number of
valid signatures to qualify the measure for the ballot.
9,702 signatures were required to place an initiative
ordinance on the ballot. The campaign to collect signatures was lead by Waterfront for All, organized by David Beltran.[1]

This number is equal to 5% of the total number of people who voted for Mayor in
2011. A random check of the signatures submitted by
the proponents of the initiative petition prior to the
July 8, 2013, submission deadline showed that the
total number of valid signatures was greater than the
number required.[1]